Dangerous Implants and Implant Related Laws

Csengeri Law Wants to Keep You Informed About Dangerous Implants and Implant Related Law.

Welcome to the official blog of Csengeri Law! Here at Csengeri Law, we are devoted to providing people who have suffered at the hands of faulty or defective medical implants. We pay careful attention to the past, present and future of implant related legal matters. We have worked extensively to ensure that patients are apprised of their rights and potential legal recourses to a defective or recalled implant. This blog represents our newest effort to bring information regarding the big implant manufacturers to the public, as well as offering information on other implant related medical matters.

Tens of thousands of patients can suffer when firms like Zimmer, DePuy and Stryker release a faulty implant. At Csengeri Law, we’re devoted to helping these patients in every way we can. That means offering top notch legal representation as well as regularly offering consultations to implant victims. We also like to keep the public informed on the latest legal trials, medical discoveries and other implant related legal matters. Just being informed of the rights and options available can help patients state of mind, which can be important to a full scale recovery after an implant goes wrong.

Our founder, Steve Csengeri has dedicated himself to helping patients who have suffered. This course was made clear as Steve recovering from his own implant and winning the first settlement for the Zimmer Durom Cup.  Each and every one of us at Csengeri law is as dedicated as Steve and will be working to give you the latest in implant related knowledge and advice. Check back in for regular updates on the state of ongoing issues like the Stryker Rejuvenate and DePuy ASR recalls, as well as the latest medical updates.


Personal Injury Lawyer Stephen Csengeri responds to Glenwood Gardens Incident

Glenwood Gardens Incident: Negligence or Not?

Back on February 26, a nurse placed a call into 911 to summon for medical attention to a dying 87-year-old woman at Glenwood Gardens in Bakersfield, California.  In a distressing 7 minute and 16 second phone call, you hear the pleas of the 911 operator with the attending nurse to perform CPR to help save the dying senior.  However, the nurse refused, stating that it was against company policy to perform CPR on the residents.  Lorraine Bayless, who had collapsed in the dining area, later died.

Russ Heimerich, a spokeman for the California Board of Registered Nursing, states, “The consensus is if [someone is] a nurse and if they are at work as a nurse, then they should be offering the appropriate medical care.”

However, according the Executive Director of Glenwood Gardens, Jeffrey Toomer, the woman followed the facility’s policy which is to call emergency medical personnel for assistance and wait with the individual needing medical attention until emergency medical personnel arrives.

Glenwood Gardens is an independent living facility and, unlike nursing homes, they generally do not provide medical care to its senior residences.  They are essentially apartments for seniors and while they typically have nurses on staff, they lack skilled nursing facilities found in most nursing homes, which are used to provide senior residents around-the-clock care.

The family of the deceased senior has indicated that they have no intentions of suing Glenwood Gardens or seeking any kind of punishment for its workers.  They said that it was Bayless’ desire to forego resuscitation efforts and that they understood the facility’s procedures regarding providing medical attention.

Nonetheless, this incident has surely raised a number of concerns on a national level as the 911 call and the story started to hit the media about the policies maintained at senior living facilities throughout the country.  The Bakersfield Police Department has closed its own investigation to determine whether or not there were criminal charges to be filed.   While the criminal investigation of this particular case has been closed, it has prompted for legislation to prevent this from happening again.

This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the personal injury needs of those throughout the greater Los Angeles and South Bay areas for over 25 years.  We can also handle any medical malpractice cases nationwide.  If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310)373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights.  We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!


Source: HuffingtonPost.com

Depuy ASR Settlement

There are various types of artificial hips available on the market today. Most are composed of a mixture of metal, plastic or ceramic. But a new type of artificial hip has been introduced recently, made completely out of metal. While they were promoted as a next generation hip replacement, these metal on metal implants have receive attention from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration due to reported problems.

A hip replacement system is composed of different parts. One of those is the ball and socket that mimics the organic hip and allows movement. In some of the new hip replacements, both the ball and the socket are made entirely out of metal. The problem with these all metal parts is that if there are imperfections with their design, potentially severe complications could result for the patient. Reported side effects include inflammation, release of metal ions in the body, difficulty walking, pain and failure of the implant.

One of the most dangerous problems is the release of metal ions as friction between the ball and the cup causes microscopic metallic shavings to separate from the implant. This can lead to a condition called metallosis when the metal ions start entering the bloodstream. Even at low concentrations, these metal ions can cause inflammation, severe pain, as well as problems with the thyroid gland, heart or nervous system.

The DePuy ASR is one of the metal on metal hip implants that has been the subject of attention due to potential defects. Any patient that currently has the DePuy ASR implanted should be aware of the risks involved and pay close attention to symptoms that may indicate the device might have a defect.

If you notice any side effects from the hip implant, even if they seem minor, you should consult your orthopedic surgeon to have the implant inspected. This can help prevent more serious complications from arising. In some cases, it may be necessary to completely replace the implant.

Those who have suffered negative reactions to metal on metal hip replacement devices should know that legal recourse is available. There are currently hundreds of cases which are pending in California State Court related to potentially defective hip implant products. If you have been injured by a hip replacement should consult an experienced attorney that specializes in personal injury cases. This can help you better understand your legal rights as well as the remedies that may be available to you.

This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the personal injury needs of those throughout the country for over 25 years.  If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury as a result of the a defective Depuy ASR hip replacement or other defective medical device, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310)373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights.  We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!

Personal Injury Lawyer Csengeri Law

Should You File a Personal Injury Lawsuit or Not?

Often times when people are involved in some kind of accident, medical malpractice or some other kind of incident that results in an injury, they question about whether or not they should take some kind of legal actions. For some, legal action is what immediately comes to mind and, for others, it may take a bit more convincing about doing so.

While, ultimately, it is highly recommended that an individual seek out the advice and direction of a skilled and experienced personal injury attorney to make the final determination about whether or not a lawsuit is the right course of action, here are some important questions and considerations one should make when determining whether or not to take legal action for a personal injury.

• Did you suffer any injuries that resulted in medical attention? If you suffered any kind of injury as a result of an accident, use of a particular product or the actions of someone else, you should seek medical attention. Even for what may seem to be a minor injury not worth going to either the Emergency Room at the nearest hospital or to your primary physician, the fact is, you are not a doctor, so you should not make your own determinations about your medical condition without the knowledge and expertise of someone who is. Going to the doctors not only helps properly identify any injuries you may be experiencing, but it also helps create a physical record of the time of injury and the possible causes. While all personal injury cases do not necessarily need to be serious enough to warrant the need for medical attention, it is wise to seek medical attention to then determine if your injuries are severe enough and also diagnosed as a cause of the particular incident or use of a product.

• Are you still suffering from those injuries? Injuries come in all kinds of shapes and sizes. For some people, injuries are immediate and apparent. For others, injuries as a result of a particular accident or use of a product may not be discovered until down the road. Many accidents or faulty products may come with long-term side effects on your health and well-being, which is another reason for seeking medical attention and advice whenever you are exploring your options for potential legal action.

• Were your injuries preventable if it weren’t for the negligence or intentional actions of a third party? In a personal injury case, the victim must be able to show that the actions or conduct of a third party violates one or more of the following three areas: (1) Negligence; (2) Strict Liability; and, (3) Intentional Wrong. The first is pretty obvious. If your injuries are the result of one’s negligence, which could have been prevented had greater care or concern of another third party, you may very well have a personal injury case. The second, strict liability, is a part of product liability law – – essentially protecting consumers from defective or harmful products. Even though there may be no intentional malice or negligence on the part of a manufacturer, these laws were put into the place to protect consumers. Lastly, there’s intentional wrong, which does cover the case where there may be known intentional criminal acts or other malicious wrong-doing by another to cause personal harm to a victim. If your injuries can fall in any one of these three categories, then you may very well have a good case for a personal injury lawsuit.

• Can you identify a third party that is at fault for your injuries? One major question you must ask yourself when determining whether or not to file a personal injury lawsuit is if you can clearly identify a third party that is at fault. It doesn’t have to be a specific person. Perhaps it’s a company, a particular medical group, perhaps there’s an argument that more than one person is to blame. For example, this may be the case in a medical malpractice case where there may be negligence from say doctors, surgeons and product manufacturers. Whether you know who the third parties are or not, identifying the right third parties to go after and hold liable for your personal injuries is crucial to your case. A skilled and experienced personal injury lawyer can assist you with this task.

• How long has it been since the accident? Last, but not least, you may have the “perfect” personal injury case, but if you don’t act in a timely manner, you may not be able to even file a lawsuit. Every state has its own set of what is known as “statute of limitations”. These laws lay out the amount of time a personal injury victim has from the time of the incident to the time a suit must be filed. In the state of California, the current law gives a victim up to 2 years. If the injury was not discovered right away, which was the case for some victims of the Zimmer Durom Cup and DePuy ASR hip replacement surgeries, then victims have up to 2 years from the time the injury was discovered.

As you can see, there are a number of factors that are weighed when determining whether or not a personal injury lawsuit makes sense for an individual. Rather than make these determinations yourself and especially given the issues surrounding statute of limitations, be sure to seek out a qualified and experienced personal injury lawyer to assist you with your case. You don’t want to have a situation where you may fail to timely or properly file your lawsuit, which can blow your entire case altogether!

This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the personal injury needs of clients nationwide along with the greater Los Angeles and South Bay areas for over 25 years. If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310)373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights. We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Trial

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Trial Underway
The trial in the first DePuy ASR hip replacement lawsuit is scheduled to begin January 25. The case, In re: Kransky and Kransky v. Depuy, Inc., et al. BC456086, Los Angeles Superior Court, was filed by Loren Kransky and his wife after he suffered medical problems that he alleges were caused by a DePuy ASR hip replacement implant he received in 2007.

The Kransky’s filed the lawsuit against DePuy claiming 14 causes of action including negligence, strict products liability, misrepresentation and breach of warranty. Kransky alleges that the DePuy ASR device caused him various medical problems including metal poisoning. He believes that Johnson and Johnson, the parent company of DePuy, was aware that a high percentage of the ASR hip replacement devices would fail within a period of five years and cause medical problems in recipients of the device.

At the beginning of the Kransky trial on January 25, the court dismissed the strict products liability, negligent recall and unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices causes at the request of DePuy. The Kransky’s voluntarily dismissed the loss of consortium cause.

According to court records in the Kransky lawsuit, the DePuy ASR lawyer is expected to argue that Kransky’s preexisting medical conditions caused his illness, not the ASR device that Kransky had removed in 2011. The DePuy ASR lawyer is also expected to argue that Kransky filed the lawsuit in response to information about the DePuy ASR recall they read about on the Internet, not in response to his medical condition.

Johnson and Johnson recalled 93,000 DePuy ASR hip replacement devices in 2010. Side effects were listed as a high device failure rate making corrective surgery necessary and metal poisoning. More than 37,000 of those recalled were located in the United States. Over 10,000 lawsuits are now pending in various United States courts. Approximately 7,000 of the DePuy ASR recall lawsuits have been consolidated in a multidistrict litigation in the United States Circuit Court, Northern District of Ohio.

The Rottenstein Law Group, RLG, is closely following the proceedings in the Kransky lawsuit. Their website provides updates on the DePuy ASR lawsuits. It also provides information regarding side effects of the device and tips on evaluating whether individuals who have had an ASR hip replacement implant should file a lawsuit. The website recommends that individuals contact a hip replacement lawyer if they had any side effects from a DePuy ASR device.

Rochelle Rottenstein, founder of RLG, maintains that determining the truth in each lawsuit is the most important thing. She stated that DePuy should not be held responsible if Kransky’s medical issues were caused by preexisting conditions.

Metal Hip Replacement Lawyer

Erosion of the Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant: A Look at the Negative Effects of Metal Hip Replacements
For those who have experienced hip joint deterioration, they know the pain and stiffness that accompanies it and how it can create great difficulty in walking. When the pain and stiffness becomes too great, some patients turn to the respite of a hip replacement or hip resurfacing. One of these systems, the metal-on-metal hip implant device, has both ball and socket joints made of metal. Although the metal-on-metal hip implant systems, including the DePuy ASR™ Hip System, the DePuy Pinnacle® Hip System, and the Zimmer Durom® Cup, have some benefits such as resilience (lessened likelihood of dislocation and device fracture), they have been under harsh review due to the negative side effects some patients endured.

It has been discovered that small metal particles can wear off the device when movement such as walking, running, or other activities cause friction of the ball and socket joint. The particles have had different effects in different patients. The metal particles may enter the bone or tissue surrounding the implant or could even enter the bloodstream. This erosion of the hip implant can lead to discomfort, pain, and damage to the surrounding tissue and even the subsequent loosening of the metal-on-metal joint itself. Although in the minority, some patients have experienced negative reactions to the metal ions that have entered their bloodstreams. These ions can affect the heart, central nervous system, and even the thyroid. Some of these symptoms are listed on the U.S. Food and Drug Administraion (FDA) website, entitled “Concerns about Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Systems.”
Signs of Possible Hip Implant Erosion
If you or a loved one are experiencing any of the below symptoms, you should immediately consult with a physician as they could indicate a severe problem with your metal-on-metal hip implant device.
The symptoms below may indicate that your hip implant has been eroding, causing metal particles to embed in your bone or tissue, or that your implant may be loosening.
-Pain or inflammation in the hip area
-Pain in the leg or groin
-Stiffness, limping, or persisting difficulty walking

The symptoms listed below may be indicative of a negative reaction to metal ions that the implant has released.
-Chest Pain
-Shortness of breath
-Blurry vision
-Changes in hearing
-Feeling cold
-Weight gain
-Altered urination habits (increased or decreased frequency)

While these symptoms are not necessarily related to problems with the implant device itself, it is crucial to consult with your orthopedic surgeon and have a physical exam. Imaging tests and blood tests will help to determine if there is, indeed, an issue with your prosthetic.

What to Do if You Are Experiencing Hip Implant Side Effects
Further surgery may be required for those patients who have experienced severe side effects relating to the DePuy ASR™, DePuy Pinnacle®, Zimmer Durom® and other metal hip resurfacing and replacement systems. The expense of the actual surgical procedure and resultant recovery time could be considerable and crippling to many patients. An option to prevent financial insecurity during a time of physical insecurity is to file a lawsuit and seek financial compensation for the cost of surgery and time off from work. The injured patient and his/her family will then be able to turn their focus onto their recovery and move forward without the weight of crippling financial harm.

In July 2008, the Zimmer Durom® Acetabular Component was voluntarily recalled, as was the DePuy ASR™ XL Acetabular in August 2010. If you or a loved one are still living with one of these devices, or if you have experienced adverse side effects related to these or other hip implant devices, contact Csengeri Law Offices to learn about your options.

Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law Offices himself made the first claim against Zimmer for their defective Durom cup and negotiated the very first settlement for his own claim. His personal experience will help guide you through your free and confidential review of your case and help you to best determine your next step in finding solutions.

Stryker Neptune Device Hip Recall Lawyer

Stryker Recalls Neptune Devices in Wake of Hip Implant Recall

Just months after Stryker Orthopedics issued a voluntary product recall of its ABG II modular-neck stem, the United States Food and Drug Administration (U.S. FDA) released reports of Stryker issuing a Class 1 recall of its Neptune Rover Waste Management System in the United States as well as parts of Asia and Latin America. This Class 1 recall is the most serious level of a device recall and did so following two people had reported serious injury, one fatally, from using the Neptune Waste Management System.

In June 2012, Stryker initiated a Class 1 to warn consumers that the devices should not be connected to any passive drainage tubes, which was not included in the warning label on the product. However, in September 2012, the company extended the recall to inform customers that the Neptune 1 Silver, Neptune 2 Ultra and a higher-powered Neptune 2 Ultra did not have the approval of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

According to a statement released by Stryker, “[The FDA doesn’t consider the devices] to be legally marketed devices because their safety and effectiveness have not yet been determined…As such, FDA advises that the devices not be used.”

This news, as mentioned, comes just a few months following Stryker’s recall of its hip implant systems, Rejuvenate and ABG II Modular Neck-System. Both systems contained various sizes of neck and stem components, allowing doctors and surgeons to create a custom fit when building a patient a new hip for hip replacement surgery. The components, however, are made of metal and lead to the same dangerous effects to be found of other metal-on-metal hip implant components, such as the Zimmer “Durom Cup” and DePuy ASR hip replacement system. When the metal neck and metal stem rubbed together, it can cause the device to weaken and even fail within a few years of the hip replacement surgery. Additionally, the grinding metal can leave a significant amount of metal resiudue, causing cases of metallosis (also known as metal poisoning).

An estimated 20,000 Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II hip components were sold in the United States before the recall in July 2012. Patients who have received or think they may have received one of these faulty implants are encouraged to contact a qualified attorney who can properly advise them of what actions to take.

This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the needs of client for over 25 years. If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310) 373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights. We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!

Personal Injury Lawyer Los Angeles, CA Csengeri Law

As previously posted [post link to previous blog entry], the New England Compounding Company (NECC) is currently under investigation for tainted pharmaceutical products which have been linked to a potential meningitis outbreak.

The first (of many) lawsuits have been filed in a Massachusetts court against NECC for its negligence which resulted in three patients who were being treated for back pain to develop fungal meningitis.
The Chicago-based law firm of Burke, Wise, Morrissey and Kaveny (BWMK) filed lawsuits on behalf of the three Michigan-based plaintiffs, Margaret Snopkowski, Dirk Thompson, III and Murial Armstrong. According to attorney Elizabeth Kaveny of BWMK, “Doctor’s offices should be a safe place, not somewhere where patients get a life-threatening illness like fungal meningitis. The steroids used to treat patients were contaminated and hundreds of people across the country are now suffering.”
The three plaintiffs were being injected a steroid, methylprednisolone acetate, as treatment for back pain. The steroids were manufactured by NECC, which produces custom-mixed solutions and medications. NECC has recalled more than 17,000 of the steroid and in October 2012, the Food and Drug Administration found fungal contamination in a sealed vial of the steroid.
As of today, there have been 23 confirmed deaths out of 284 meningitis cases that span 16 states. Authorities believe that there may be more cases still to come forward as an estimated 14,000 patients were exposed to the infected steroids.
Of the lawsuits already filed by plaintiffs, NECC is named as the sole defendant. However, as more and more cases come forward, more defendants may soon be named. This can include the medical and pain clinics, as well as the doctors who administered the drugs.
In addition to these three cases filed in Massachusetts, over ten lawsuits have already been filed (including one calling for a class action lawsuit) in Indiana, Michigan, Virginia, Florida, New Jersey and Minnesota. Some plaintiffs have confirmed meningitis, while others are filing claims against NECC due to “bodily harm, emotional distress and other personal injuries”.
The meningitis cases do not appear to be at the level of mass settlements of hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars yet. In the past, when hundreds (and even thousands) of cases have come forward, the cases have been consolidated into a large class action lawsuit which often results in a mass settlement for damages. According to the plaintiffs, NECC’s insurance coverage is not adequate to cover the extent of their liability.
These lawsuits are just the start of the legal troubles to come for NECC, its officers, directors and others that may be named for their negligence and involvement in the meningitis outbreak.
This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the personal injury needs of those throughout the greater Los Angeles and South Bay areas for over 25 years. If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310) 373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights. We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!

Zimmer Durom Cup Lawyer

U.S. Pharmaceutical Company Linked to Meningitis Breakout

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently investigating the New England Compounding Center (NECC), urging doctors through 23 states to contact an estimated 14,000 patients who were prescribed tainted pharmaceutical products. The Massachusetts-based pharmacy recalled all of its products on October 6th after dozens of people were infected with meningitis. Health officials have recently identified two new drugs which may also be linked to the meningitis outbreak.

Meningitis has a long incubation period, which can complicate efforts to identify patients that may be affected. One patient did not develop any systems for over 40 days after receiving a tainted steroid injection. So far 214 cases and a total of 15 deaths have been reported and these numbers are increasing daily.

This meningitis outbreak has raised concerns and a call to action for tighter regulations for the loosely controlled pharmaceutical compounding industry. Critics believe that the drug manufacturers have found a way to sidestep costly and strict regulations by classifying themselves as pharmacies, which are not governed nearly as strictly for mixing drug compounds for patients.

NECC was warned by the FDA back in 2006 that its practices were violating regulations and has been under investigation by state health authorities. Several lawmakers have responded to the meningitis outbreak with promises to introduce new legislation to help bring stricter regulations to the pharmaceutical compounding industry and potential criminal investigations against any violators.

It is unknown how many patients may still be at risk now that two additional drugs have been linked to the meningitis. According to FDA spokesperson, Sarah Clark-Lynn, “The FDA continues to work with NECC to get more information on the distribution of their products. As part of the ongoing investigation, FDA continues to work with the CDC as well as state health officials to determine the scope and severity of this public health concern.”

The FDA also cautioned that it has not yet confirmed that the NECC products were the cause of the meningitis outbreak.

Patients who believe that they received an injection or other product compounded by NECC after May 21st of this year are urged to be on alert for any signs or symptoms of infection, including meningitis. This can include fever, headache, stiff neck, nausea, vomiting, sensitivity to light, swelling, slurred speech, chest pain, weakness or stiffness in joints and altered mental states. If you experience any of these symptoms and were injected with medication recently, be sure to contact your doctor right away.

California has been identified as one the 23 states that received the steroid injection called methylprednisolone from NECC. However, no cases of infection have been reported in California, although the California Department of Public Health estimates that 500 to 600 patients may have been injected with the recalled steroid.

This investigation is long from over as they continue to look into the NECC’s facilities and practices. It has brought to light a much bigger issue about the regulation of this industry and as more details begin to unfold and a cause for the meningitis outbreak is determined and the responsible party is confirmed, victims will surely have rights to hold the parties responsible for the death and illness of those affected. Stay tuned…

This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the needs of client for over 25 years. If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310) 373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights. We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!

DePuy Lawyer and Lawsuits

The First of DePuy Settlements Announced

The first of lawsuit settlements from DePuy parent company, Johnson & Johnson, were announced recently with an estimated $600,000 to settle the first three cases of an estimated 8,000 lawsuits brought against the company for its faulty hip implants back in 2010. Over 90,000 ASR hip implants worldwide were recalled by DePuy in 2010 when more than 12% of the devices failed within the first five years of replacement.

Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy unit is estimated to pay out $200,000 per case on three cases that were expected to go to trial later this year. According to Eric Gordon, a business professor from the University of Michigan, the payout was on the “low end of what the company should have expected”, stating that Johnson & Johnson could have expected to pay out onwards of up to $500,000 to settle each case.

For more information about the first settlements of the DePuy lawsuits, click here.

At Csengeri Law, we bring over 25 years of personal injury experience so we bring our years of experience and expertise to the table. Attorney Stephen Csengeri has personally experienced his own personal injury case, which gives him a unique advantage to be able to relate to his clients and understand their needs, concerns and feelings about their situation. Further, Attorney Csengeri is committed to providing the best service to his clients by offering free initial consultations, contingency legal fees and personal service. If you or someone you love has received the defective DePuy ASR hip implant, contact Csengeri Law at (310) 373-9330 today to discuss your case and to schedule a free consultation.

This post is brought to you the good folks at Csengeri Law, servicing the needs of client for over 25 years. If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death, call Stephen Csengeri of Csengeri Law at (310) 373-9330 or through our website to set up a free meeting to discuss your case and explore your rights. We’d love to connect with you on Facebook!

Source: BusinessWeek.com